Cited by 51Diabetes Treatment and ManagementDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsDiabetes Management and Research

Predicting 6-Year Mortality Risk in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes

Open access
Wells, Brian J., Jain, Anil, Arrigain, Susana, Yu, Changhong, Rosenkrans, Wayne A., Kattan, Michael W.·2008·Diabetes Care

Abstract

OBJECTIVE—The objective of this study was to create a tool that predicts the risk of mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—This study was based on a cohort of 33,067 patients with type 2 diabetes identified in the Cleveland Clinic electronic health record (EHR) who were initially prescribed a single oral hypoglycemic agent between 1998 and 2006. Mortality was determined in the EHR and the Social Security Death Index. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was created using medication class and 20 other predictor variables chosen for their association with mortality. A prediction tool was created using the Cox model coefficients. The tool was internally validated using repeated, random subsets of the cohort, which were not used to create the prediction model. RESULTS—Follow-up in the cohort ranged from 1 day to 8.2 years (median 28.6 months), and 3,661 deaths were observed. The prediction tool had a concordance index (i.e., c statistic) of 0.752. CONCLUSIONS—We successfully created a tool that accurately predicts mortality risk in patients with type 2 diabetes. The incorporation of medications into mortality predictions in patients with type 2 diabetes should improve treatment decisions.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2337/dc08-1047

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 21 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wells, B. J., Jain, A., Arrigain, S., Yu, C., Rosenkrans, W. A., & Kattan, M. W.
Affiliations
  • Cleveland Clinic (US)
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
2008-12-01
Volume
31
Issue
12
Pages
2301-2306
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W2100982363
Cited by
51
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 7
FWCI
1.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • Diabetes Care (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
AstraZeneca
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
Keywords
type 2 diabetes, mortality prediction, predictive tools, oral antidiabetic drugs, medication classes, Cox proportional hazards model, concordance index, internal validation, electronic health records
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Cohort Studies, Proportional Hazards Models, Risk Assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review